Linked by Thom Holwerda on Thu 29th Sep 2005 10:32 UTC
Permalink for comment 37884
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
News
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/23/13 23:22 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/23/13 22:04 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/23/13 22:01 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/23/13 17:52 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/22/13 22:23 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/22/13 13:38 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/22/13 13:30 UTC, submitted by JRepin
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/21/13 22:06 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/21/13 21:45 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/21/13 15:53 UTC
More News »
Sponsored Links



Member since:
2005-07-06
But it's too heavy for those machines...remember, they're made as cheap as possible, but still useable. Which means probably 128MB of RAM or something like that...FURTHERMORE, there's one very important difference to our typical laptops/desktops - swap is to be avoided at all costs (flash based - limited number of read/writes and...slow). Personally, I would modify the kernel/desktop enviroment (or something) that it will not allow launching of new apps when physical memory limit is closing in (eventually - allow, but display something like "to assure longevity of your laptop, please close applications you're not using)
BTW, where does this 70% number come from?